{"id":239757,"date":"2026-01-15T07:20:14","date_gmt":"2026-01-15T12:20:14","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/today.uconn.edu\/?p=239757"},"modified":"2026-01-15T13:23:42","modified_gmt":"2026-01-15T18:23:42","slug":"whats-going-on-with-gifted-education","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/today.uconn.edu\/2026\/01\/whats-going-on-with-gifted-education\/","title":{"rendered":"What\u2019s Going on With Gifted Education?"},"content":{"rendered":"

While\u00a0gifted and talented education programs can be found in\u00a0most public\u00a0schools\u00a0in\u00a0the country, there is no federal standard for how they are carried out \u2013 or how students are\u00a0selected for them.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

For educators and education researchers, this presents a problem.\u00a0How can we be sure that gifted programs are\u00a0fulfilling their purpose:\u00a0helping ensure students are adequately challenged and supported in school?\u00a0This mission is especially critical in\u00a0today\u2019s\u00a0era of\u00a0widespread budget cuts to public education.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Scholars at the\u00a0<\/span>National Center for Research on Gifted Education (NCRGE)<\/span><\/a>, headquartered at UConn,\u00a0recently completed a study exploring\u00a0how gifted education is carried out in three\u00a0US\u00a0states.\u00a0The findings, published in\u00a0the journal\u00a0<\/span>Gifted Child Quarterly<\/span><\/a>,\u00a0provide insights\u00a0into the impacts and efficacy of these programs \u2013 as well as ways they can be improved.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"Morgaen
Del Siegle (center) was awarded the UConn Neag School of Education Distinguished Researcher Award in 2024. (Evan Elmore\/Neag School)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

\u201cWe\u2019re seeing that there\u2019s a lot of very bright kids who are not achieving at the rates we would expect them to be achieving, and when we examine that data, it\u2019s really evident that we\u2019re leaving a lot of talent on the vine, so to speak,\u201d\u00a0says Del Siegle, the study\u2019s first author (and the Lynn and Ray Neag Endowed Chair for Talent Development in UConn\u2019s Neag School of Education).\u00a0\u201cWe need to do a better job of\u00a0identifying\u00a0kids for these services, and then we need to do a better job\u00a0<\/span>providing\u00a0<\/span><\/i>these services.\u201d<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Fostering gifted education has been a lifelong mission for\u00a0Siegle, who is\u00a0the\u00a0director of the\u00a0NCRGE\u00a0and of the\u00a0<\/span>Renzulli Center for Creativity, Gifted Education, and Talent Development<\/span><\/a>.\u00a0He\u00a0hopes this\u00a0new\u00a0research can\u00a0help\u00a0steer the future of the field.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Challenges in Identification<\/h3>\n

The definition of giftedness has been evolving ever since it was coined\u00a0in the early 20<\/span>th<\/span>\u00a0century.\u00a0At first, students were identified as gifted based solely on IQ scores.\u00a0That\u2019s\u00a0no longer the standard, as\u00a0subsequent\u00a0decades of research have shown the limitations of IQ evaluations\u00a0\u2013\u00a0like cultural biases, and their focus on a single axis of intelligence\u00a0(neglecting creative and emotional intelligence, for instance).\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Siegle believes that in today\u2019s world, gifted identification\u00a0should be pursued from the standpoint of a \u201ctalent scout, not a deficit detective.\u201d<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cWe need to be all about\u00a0providing\u00a0opportunities,\u201d he says. \u201cThat\u2019s\u00a0much more important\u00a0than\u00a0saying, \u2018This kid\u2019s gifted, this\u00a0kid\u2019s\u00a0not gifted.\u2019 We should be less worried about stamping this label on\u00a0kids, and\u00a0more concerned with providing opportunities to develop kids\u2019 talents.\u201d<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

In this paper, the researchers note that most school districts now use multiple methods of analysis for\u00a0identifying\u00a0gifted students, such as\u00a0achievement tests, creativity tests, and behavior rating scales.\u00a0But these metrics are also not free from bias, and many gifted programs still rely on\u00a0individual referrals from teachers rather than instituting a universal screening program,\u00a0presenting another opportunity for potential bias.\u00a0In other words, there are still plenty of cracks for students to fall through.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cWe have confirmed that there is this issue of under-representation,\u201d Siegle says. \u201cSome populations\u00a0aren\u2019t\u00a0being served by gifted programs to the extent they should be.\u201d<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

In this\u00a0study, the researchers\u00a0identified\u00a0a few key takeaways\u00a0to help combat bias in the identification of students for gifted programs.\u00a0One common hurdle they\u00a0identified\u00a0was simply\u00a0the year in which gifted identification\u00a0takes place\u00a0\u2013 typically in the second or third grade.\u00a0By\u00a0this point,\u00a0significant achievement gaps have already\u00a0emerged\u00a0between\u00a0underserved students and their peers.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201c<\/span>If gifted programs offer significant benefits, historically underserved groups face a double disadvantage\u00a0\u2014\u00a0first by experiencing early achievement gaps, and then by having restricted access to advanced programs due to these\u00a0initial\u00a0disparities,\u201d the researchers write.\u00a0So, they recommend,\u00a0\u201cDistricts should consider\u00a0initiating\u00a0universal screening for giftedness in kindergarten or first grade rather than waiting until second or third grade.\u201d<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Identifying\u00a0gifted students in second or third grade poses another problem — if students are only\u00a0assessed for\u00a0gifted programs\u00a0at this point, there is\u00a0little\u00a0opportunity for older students to enter these programs.\u00a0Instead, the researchers recommend formal\u00a0mandates for\u00a0regular re-assessment of students. They also caution against relying on teacher or parent referrals alone, which they note may introduce subjectivity or delay access.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Finally, the researchers recommend another measure that could dramatically improve representation of ESOL (English as a second or foreign language) students in gifted programs: testing students in their native language.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cEnglish learners are one of the fastest-growing populations of students we have in this country,\u201d notes Siegle. \u201cWe\u00a0tend to\u00a0put these kids\u2019 learning on hold [while they are learning English], which is such a travesty \u2013\u00a0we’re\u00a0ignoring the challenge and the opportunity here. If we can provide testing in their native language, then we can spot this talent earlier, and we can do something to develop it.\u201d<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Programming\u00a0and\u00a0Curriculum<\/h3>\n

After students are identified for gifted education, what sort of educational programming do they actually receive?\u00a0The answer varies\u00a0greatly state\u00a0by state. In fact, out of the 28 states that mandate gifted education programming, only half specify\u00a0a mandatory minimum number of hours per week.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Many programs\u00a0offer\u00a0only 1-2\u00a0hours\u00a0of instruction\u00a0a week\u00a0(even though, as Siegle says, \u201cGifted students are gifted all the time, not just for a couple hours\u201d).\u00a0And within this window, there is little standardization for what is taught\u00a0\u2013 another area for improvement in the field.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

The most common method for gifted programming is pull-out instruction, in which students are removed (pulled out) from their regular classrooms to receive specialized instruction.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Other methods include \u201cpush-in,\u201d in which a gifted specialist enters a regular classroom to work with students individually, and\u00a0cluster grouping, in which gifted students are clustered together in a regular classroom to work with a teacher who has specialized training.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Siegle’s research has found\u00a0that schools\/districts who implemented push-in instruction\u00a0demonstrated\u00a0higher academic achievement for gifted students. This suggests that\u00a0the push-in model\u00a0may be a beneficial technique for more schools to practice.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

But the\u00a0researchers\u00a0also\u00a0identified\u00a0ways that the classic pull-out model could be improved to better support students\u2019 learning.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

They were surprised to discover that the classes students were being pulled out of didn\u2019t\u00a0necessarily\u00a0correspond to the content of the pull-out instruction: for example, a\u00a0child who\u00a0is\u00a0gifted in math may be pulled out of a language arts classroom to receive accelerated math instruction, potentially causing them to fall further behind in their weaker subject.\u00a0The researchers strongly recommend that schools work to resolve this misalignment.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Every child deserves to learn something new every day.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

They also recommend that districts regularly evaluate their own gifted programs to ensure alignment among student identification, curriculum, and service delivery. In the absence of federal or state standards for these metrics, it can be difficult to know where to start, but district self-evaluation can help with\u00a0goal-setting\u00a0and tracking performance over time.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Moving forward into the future of public education in America, Siegle would like to see a reinvestment in providing opportunities for all children, especially gifted children who are currently being under-identified or underserved.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cA lot of times what happens in schools is they try to figure out what a kid\u00a0<\/span>can\u2019t\u00a0<\/span><\/i>do, and\u00a0then remediate it,\u201d says Siegle. \u201cBut that\u00a0doesn\u2019t\u00a0move us forward as a country, and that\u00a0doesn\u2019t\u00a0make school interesting for kids.\u00a0Every child deserves to learn something new every day,\u00a0and kids need an opportunity to develop their interests and strengths.\u201d<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

In this vein, Siegle is part of several research\u00a0initiatives\u00a0funded by the federal\u00a0<\/span>Jacob K. Javits Gifted and Talented Students Education Program<\/span><\/a>. One,\u00a0<\/span>Project BUMP UP<\/span><\/a>, is currently evaluating the efficacy of\u00a0push-in math education for gifted students. Another,\u00a0<\/span>Project EAGLE,<\/span><\/a>\u00a0is offering no-cost workshops to help educators\u00a0identify\u00a0gifted students whose first language is not English.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

In addition to Siegle, the research team for this paper included\u00a0UConn educational psychology professor\u00a0D. Betsy\u00a0McCoach;\u00a0E.\u00a0Jean Gubbins, UConn\u00a0gifted education\u00a0professor\u00a0emerita\u00a0and associate director of the\u00a0NCRGE; Rashea Hamilton, former UConn postdoctoral research\u00a0associate; Gregory T. Boldt\u00a0\u201824 Ph.D.; and\u00a0Carolyn Callahan, commonwealth professor of education emeritus at the University of Virginia.<\/span><\/i>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

UConn researchers help steer the field in new publication<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":175,"featured_media":239758,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_crdt_document":"","wds_primary_category":0,"wds_primary_series":0,"wds_primary_attribution":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[2460,1855,2648,2076,2235,2227],"tags":[],"magazine-issues":[],"coauthors":[2413],"class_list":["post-239757","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-faculty","category-neag","category-blue-research","category-research","category-today-homepage","category-uconn-edu-homepage"],"pp_statuses_selecting_workflow":false,"pp_workflow_action":"current","pp_status_selection":"publish","acf":[],"publishpress_future_action":{"enabled":false,"date":"2026-04-12 21:49:59","action":"change-status","newStatus":"draft","terms":[],"taxonomy":"category","extraData":[]},"publishpress_future_workflow_manual_trigger":{"enabledWorkflows":[]},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/today.uconn.edu\/wp-rest\/wp\/v2\/posts\/239757","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/today.uconn.edu\/wp-rest\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/today.uconn.edu\/wp-rest\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/today.uconn.edu\/wp-rest\/wp\/v2\/users\/175"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/today.uconn.edu\/wp-rest\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=239757"}],"version-history":[{"count":7,"href":"https:\/\/today.uconn.edu\/wp-rest\/wp\/v2\/posts\/239757\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":239885,"href":"https:\/\/today.uconn.edu\/wp-rest\/wp\/v2\/posts\/239757\/revisions\/239885"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/today.uconn.edu\/wp-rest\/wp\/v2\/media\/239758"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/today.uconn.edu\/wp-rest\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=239757"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/today.uconn.edu\/wp-rest\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=239757"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/today.uconn.edu\/wp-rest\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=239757"},{"taxonomy":"magazine-issue","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/today.uconn.edu\/wp-rest\/wp\/v2\/magazine-issues?post=239757"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/today.uconn.edu\/wp-rest\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=239757"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}